DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

SABBAVARAM, VISAKHAPATNAM, A.P., INDIA

PROJECT TITLE

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY

SUBJECT
POLITICAL SCIENCE-II

NAME OF THE FACULTY

MRS. T. Y. NIRMALA DEVI

NAME OF THE CANDIDATE: AMANDEEP MALIK

ROLL NUMBER: 19LLB076

SEMESTER: 2nd

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 2

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

It is our privilege to express our sincerest regards to our faculty for his valuable inputs, able
guidance, encouragement, wholehearted corporations and constructive criticism throughout the
duration of our project.
I deeply express our sincere thanks to our MRS. T. Y. NIRMALA DEVI for encouraging and
allowing for the History project on the topic “INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND
DIPLOMACY”
I take this opportunity to thank all our lecturers who have directly or indirectly helped me in
the particular project.

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................ 4

1. OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY ................................................................................................ 5

2. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY............................................................................................ 5

3. SCOPE OF STUDY ............................................................................................................... 5

4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY.............................................................................................. 5

5. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 6

5.1. INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS ........................................................................................ 6

5.2. MEANING OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS ................................................................... 6

5.3. SCOPE OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS......................................................................... 9

6. DIPLOMACY .................................................................................................................... 12

7. THEORIES AND APPROACHES OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS....................................... 13

7.1. LIBERAL APPROACH .................................................................................................. 13

7.2. POLITICAL REALISM ................................................................................................... 17

7.3. NEO-REALISM ........................................................................................................... 19

7.4. SYSTEM THEORY........................................................................................................ 20

8. BALANCE OF POWER ....................................................................................................... 22

9. FUNCTIONS OF DIPLOMACY ............................................................................................ 23

9.1. REPRESENTATION ...................................................................................................... 23

9.2. NEGOTIATION ............................................................................................................ 23

9.3. INFORMATION............................................................................................................ 24

9.4. DIPLOMATIC PROTECTION .......................................................................................... 24

9.5. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION. ................................................................................. 25

10. CONCLUSION................................................................................................................. 25

11. BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................. 26

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 4

ABSTRACT

The word ‘diplomacy’ is believed to have originated from the Greek verb ‘diploun’ meaning
to ‘fold’. Diplomacy is an inseparable component of a country’s foreign relations. Defined as
a process of negotiation to promote national interest, it is only too often identified with a
sovereign state. A careful study of the anti-colonial struggles in Asia and Africa would,
however, show that the colonized countries have tried to use the tools of diplomacy to free their
land from the colonial yoke. Missing from debates on the clash of civilizations and the post-
Cold War evolution of foreign policy and international affairs has been a serious look at
diplomacy. ‘As old ideologies disintegrate, the world has faced a rash of new difficulties as
religious, ethnic and national antagonisms have flared concurrently with the emergence of
transnational problems such as the world health crisis of AIDS, the spread of drug use,
environmental degradation, and burgeoning refugee issues. Rapid communication and much
faster transportation, plus the astounding increase in the number of nations from the 50 which
founded the United Nations to over 180, has changed the nature of diplomacy, substantially
increasing its importance as a normative and scholarly concept, the pattern of behavior and
profession. The dictionary definition of diplomacy is “the art and practice of conducting
negotiations between nations,” and “skill in handling affairs without arousing hostility.”
Reaching back into antiquity, diplomacy involved mediation or managing an entity or an
individual’s relationships with another (sometimes defined as “enemy,” sometimes not). It was
only with the development of the modern state system, dating from the 16th century that
diplomacy took on its narrower current contemporary meaning: managing the foreign affairs
of states at the governmental level. Today, both scholars and practitioners suggest this narrow
interpretation has lost its utility.

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 5

1. OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

The objective of the project is following-

i. To acquire knowledge about the international relations.

ii. To know about the different components of international relations.
iii. To knows the use of different techniques of diplomacy.
iv. To explore the concept of International Relations.

2. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The study consists of the following significance-

i. Helps in understanding the concept clearly.

ii. To know the condition of world in modern time.

3. SCOPE OF STUDY

The study has been limited to the following-

i. Study of international relations.

ii. Different aspects of international relations.
iii. Concept of Diplomacy

4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The type of method used is the Doctrinal type of Research.

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 6

5. INTRODUCTION

5.1. INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

As International relations have developed in multifaceted nature, the group of hypotheses that
IR offers has developed in number, which displays a test for newcomers to IR hypothesis.
Nonetheless, this presentation should give you the certainty to begin. To commence, this
segment will quickly present IR hypothesis by means of a three-section range of customary
speculations, center ground hypotheses and basic hypotheses. As you read further into the
book, you ought to expect this straightforward three-section picture to break down to some
degree – however it is a valuable gadget to return to should you get confounded. Hypotheses
are continually developing and contending with each other. This can be disorientating. When
you think you have discovered your feet with one hypothetical methodology, others show up.
This segment will accordingly fill in as both a preliminary and a notice that multifaceted nature
is normal ahead! Despite the fact that this book presents IR hypothesis in an especially
straightforward and essential way, intricacy remains. IR hypothesis requires your complete
consideration and you should lock in and anticipate choppiness on your voyage. Thomas
Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962) set the phase for seeing how and why
certain hypotheses are legitimized and broadly acknowledged. He additionally distinguished
the procedure that happens when speculations are never again important and new hypotheses
develop. For instance, people were once persuaded that the earth was level. With the headway
of science and innovation, there was a huge disclosure and people disposed of this conviction.
At the point when such a disclosure happens, an ‘outlook change’ results and the previous state
of mind is supplanted by another one. Despite the fact that adjustments in IR hypothesis are
not as emotional as the model above, there have been huge advancements in the control. This
is critical to remember when we think about how speculations of IR assume a job in clarifying
the world and how, in view of various timespans and our own unique circumstances, one
methodology may address us more than another. The modern way of dealing with international
problems is called International Relations. This is a very old subject ye to be need exploration
and discovery. Due to change in social, cultural, economical conditions of nation the way of
living has been changing and that is making the relations complex.
5.2. MEANING OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
It is not an easy task to give the precise meaning of international relations which when
capitalized and reduced to the acronym ‘IR’, specifies a field of study taught in universities

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 7

and colleges as a ‘subject’ or a ‘discipline’. The difficulty increases manifold because of the
tendency to use the terms ‘international relations’ and ‘international politics’ interchangeably.
Often it is taken for granted that IR is the study of international politics only. Morgenthau1 and
others viewed the core of international relations to be international politics and the subject
matter of international politics to be struggle for power among sovereign nations. Padelford
and Lincoln2 also opine that, when people speak of ‘international relations’, they are usually
thinking of the relationships between states. They further contend that such relationships
between states constitute ‘international politics’ which is the interaction of state policies within
the changing patterns of power relationship.
But international relations mean more and, as Palmer and Perkins3 point out, international
relations is related to not just politics of international community centring on diplomacy and
relations among states and other political units, it means ‘the totality of the relations among
peoples and groups in the world society’. Therefore, the term ‘international relations’ is not
only broad but means more than the official political relations between governments on behalf
of their states. As Hoffman4 suggested, the discipline of IR “is concerned with the factors and
activities which affect the external policies and the power of the basic units into which the
world is divided”.
Palmer and Perkins5 observe that IR “encompasses much more than the relations among nation-
states and international organizations and groups. It includes a great variety of transitional
relationships, at various levels, above and below the level of the nation-state, still the main
actor in the international community”.
Wright6 contended that international relations include “relations between many entities of
uncertain sovereignties” and that “it is not only the nations which international relations seek
to relate. Varied types of groups-nations, states, governments, peoples, regions, alliances,
confederations, international organizations, even industrial organizations, cultural
organizations, religious organizations-must be dealt with in the study of international relations,
if the treatment is to be realistic”.

1
MORGENTHAU, POLITICS AMONG NATIONS: THE STRUGGLE OF POWER AND PEACE (Kalyani publishers, p.31.
New Delhi, 1985).
2
NORMAN J PADELFORD, & GEORGE A. LINCOLN, INTERNATIONAL POLITICS: FOUNDATIONS OF INTERNATIONAL
RELATIONS (New York, p. 4-6, 1954).
3
NORMAN D. PALMER & HOWARD C. PERKINS, INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS- THE WORLD COMMUNITY IN
TRANSITION (A.I.T.B.S. Publishers, New Delhi, p. 115, 1997).
4
HOFFMEN, CONTEMPORARY THEORY OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS (ed., Stanley, New jersey, p.6, 1960).
5
Supra note 3.
6
WRIGHT, QUINCY, THE STUDY OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS (Appleton-Century Crofts, New York, p. 5,
1955).

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 8

A more convincing definition has been provided by Frankel7: “This new discipline is more than
a combination of the studies of the foreign affairs of the various countries and of international
history-it includes also the study of international society as a whole and of its institutions and
processes. It is increasingly concerned not only with the states and their interactions but also
with the web of trans-national politics”.
Mathiesen8 gives a much broader definition of international relations and suggests that
“International Relations embraces all kinds of relations traversing state boundaries, no matter
whether they are of an economic, legal, political, or any other character, whether they be private
or official”, and “all human behaviour originating on one side of state boundary and affecting
human behaviour on the other side of the boundary”.
Goldstein9 opines that the field of IR primarily “concerns the relationship among the world’s
governments”. But defining IR in such a way, he argues, may seem simplistic, and therefore,
to understand IR holistically, the relationship among states is to be understood in relation to
the activities of other actors (international organizations, MNCs, individuals), in connection
with other social structures (including economic, cultural and domestic politics), and
considering historical and geographical influences.
Jackson and Sorenson10 observe that “the main reason why we should study IR is the fact that
the entire populations of the world are divided into separate territorial communities, or
independent states, which profoundly affect the way people live”. This definition points to the
centrality of states and state system in the study of IR but there are other issues as well in
contemporary 1R. Jackson and Sorenson thus reflect that “at one extreme the scholarly focus
is exclusively 011 states and inter-state relations; but at another extreme IR includes almost
everything that has to do with human relations across the world. Therefore, IR seeks to
understand how people are provided or not provided, with the basic values of security, freedom,
order, justice and welfare”.
According to Lawson11 “in the simplest and narrowest senses, IR is taken to denote the study
of relations between states”. She contends that, in a broader sense, “IR denotes interactions
between state-based actors across state boundaries” meaning thereby that, besides the intimate

7
FRANKEL JOSEPH, INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS IN A CHANGING WORLD (Oxford University Press, London, p. 6,
1979).
8
Supra note 3, p.104.
9
JOSHUA S. GOLDSTEIN, INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS (Pearson Education, New Delhi, p. 29, 2006).
10
JACKSON ROBERT & GEORGE SORENSEN, INTRODUCTION TO INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-THEORIES AND
APPROACHES (Oxford University Press, London, p. 2-3, 1999).
11
LAWSON STEPHANIE, INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS (Polity Press, UK, p. 4, 2004).

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 9

concern with the state system as a whole, there is an equal concern with the activities of a
variety of non-state actors.
A somewhat standard definition of international relations has been provided by Frederick S.
Dunn 1948. He is of the view that international relations may “be looked upon as the actual
relations that take place across national boundaries, or as the body of knowledge which we
have of those relations at any given time”12. It is considered to be a comprehensive definition
because it does not limit the subject to official relations between states and governments.
Thus, it may be observed that there has been a tremendous effort on the part of the 1R scholars
to come out of a state-centric thinking and embark on a perspective, recognizing the presence
of other actors as well. Therefore, summing up the above viewpoints, it may be ascertained that
IR is a vast field encompassing the relationships among states in all their dimensions, including
interactions with various other political and non-political groups along with the study of
international history, international law, international society and international political
economy.
5.3. SCOPE OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
International Relation is a dynamic discipline. With the world fast changing in the face of
globalization, along with the threats of fundamentalism, ethnicity and terrorism, ebbing state
system, crisis in sovereignty of states, human rights, newer international regimes, the discipline
has been forced to move beyond its traditional themes and incorporate a ‘new agenda’ in its
study.
Initially, the discipline devoted itself to the study of diplomatic history, foreign policies of
states, international law, international organizations. Since the outbreak of the Second World
War and in the years following it, the world Was not only engulfed in a Cold War between the
United States and the Soviet Union but it also witnessed the birth of many new states due to
rapid decolonization, which led to an expansion of the scope of IR. As a result, new theories,
and newer methodologies to study IR emerged. As in the 1960s and 1970s, when
behaviouralism made a pathway into the study of IR, motives and behaviours of states as well
as political leaders came to be studied. It is quite an extensive discipline embracing diplomatic
history, international politics, international organization, international law, area studies,
behaviour of states and their mutual relations, international trade and foreign policy. Its scope
is still expanding and will expand in future too. As Frederick S. Dunn contends that the word

12
JAMES E. DOUGHERTY & ROBERT L. PFALTZGRAFF, CONTENDING THEORIES OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS: A
COMPREHENSIVE SURVEY (Longman, New York, p. 18, 1997).

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 10

‘scope’ is ambiguous because it implies fixed boundary lines readily identifiable as a

surveyor’s mark. Therefore, he suggested that the “subject matter of international relations
consists of whatever knowledge, from any sources, may be of assistance in meeting new
international problems or understanding old ones”. IR scholars have never agreed on where the
boundaries of their field lie.
Goldstein projects IR as a field of study focussing on:
1. Issue areas-diplomacy, war, trade relations, alliances, cultural exchanges, participation in
international organizations, etc.
2. Conflict and cooperation in relationship among states concerning issue areas.
3. International security-questions of war and peace.
4. International political economy-between 1970 and 1980-increasing concern with economic
issues made international political economy (IPE) inextricably woven into IR, especially with
regard to security issues.13
Palmer and Perkins include such topics within the domain of IR such as state system, national
power, diplomacy, propaganda, war, imperialism, balance of power, collective security,
international organizations, international law, regional conflicts, national interests, nuclear
weapon and changing international system.
According to Frankel the contents of IR must take care of the changes in the international
system, i.e., the rise in the number of states, MNCs and terrorist groups; the shift of the major
danger spots geographically, from Europe to Middle East and Africa, from the strategic to the
economic field; the growing recognition of the need for some form of global or regional
regimes, overriding sovereign states. Therefore, the study should include the making of foreign
policies, the mutual interactions among states, conflicts, competitions and cooperation among
them. national power. diplomacy, propaganda, international system and international
organization.
Coloumbis and Wolfe14 emphasize that the study of IR should involve the approaches to the
study of IR, theories of IR, nation-states and nationalism, national power, national interest,
foreign policies of nation-states and nationalism, national power, decision making, diplomacy,
war, balance of power, international law, international economy, international organizations,
functionalism and regional integration, gap between the rich and poor nation-states. new actors
in international system, threats facing humankind,

13
Supra note 9.
14
THEODRE A. COULOUMBIS & JAMES H. WOLFE, INTRODUCTION TO INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-POWER AND
JUSTICE (Prentice Hall of India, New Delhi, 1986).

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 11

Kal Holsti15 points out that during the heydays of the Cold War, the field was characterized by
three distinct sets of normative concerns or discourses which tried to answer the question ‘what
to study?’ They are:
Security, conflict and war
Cooperation and the conditions for peace
Equity, justices and the sources of international inequality
According to Jackson and Sorenson16, traditional IR was concerned solely with the
development and change of sovereign statehood in the context of the larger system or society
of states which might help in explaining the questions of war and peace. However, they assert
that contemporary IR is concerned not only with political relations between states but also with
a host of other subjects such as economic interdependence, human rights, transnational
corporations, international organizations, the environment, gender inequalities, development,
terrorism, and so forth.
Baylis and Smith in their effort to include upcoming agenda in IR tried to incorporate several
new themes. They looked not only into the historical context of international society and world
history till the end of Cold War and discussed the main theories in IR, including the new
approaches to IR theory in the post-Cold War era, but also focussed chiefly on international
security in the post-Cold War era, international political economy in the age of globalization,
international regimes, diplomacy, the UN and international organizations, transnational actors,
environmental issues, nuclear proliferation, nationalism, cultural conflicts in IR, humanitarian
intervention in world politics, regionalism and integration, global trade and finance, poverty,
development and hunger, human rights, and gender issues.
A wider content has been provided by Kegley and Wittkopf. By using macropolitical
perspective, they draw our attention to:
Characteristics, capabilities and interests of the principal actors in world politics
(nation-states and various non-state participants in international affairs).
The principal welfare and global issues that populate global agenda.
The patterns of cooperation and contention that influence the interactions between and
among actors and issues.
Lawson points out that, although the traditional concern for war and interstate warfare in
particular is still the focus of IR, but IR’s “new agenda” embraces a “vast range of policy

15
KAL J. HOLSTI, THE STUDY OF INTERNATIONAL POLITICS DURING THE COLD WAR IN TIM DUNNE (eds., Michael
Cox & Ken Booth, Cambridge University Press, London, p.26, 1998).
16
Supra note 10.

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 12

issues”. They include global environment concerns, the epidemiology of AIDS, legal and
illegal migration, including refugee movements, the North-South gap, human rights, reform of
the UN and its agencies, extension of international law, and the prosecution of crimes against
humanity, whether involving terrorism, religious fundamentalism or international organized
criminal activities that range from drug production and trafficking to money laundering,
smuggling goods of all kinds including weapons, diamonds, endangered species and people
and ‘new wars’ arising from ‘identity politics’ linked with religious, ethnic or cultural factors.
Lawson highlights that the “notion of ‘human security’ rather than ‘state security’ is now very
much in ascendance.”
The vast topics which have now come to dominate the study of IR may again not be sufficient
with the changing needs of time. Prospects of change remain as world conditions change.

6. DIPLOMACY

Strategy is an indivisible segment of a nation’s outside relations. Characterized as a procedure

of arrangement to advance national intrigue, it is very much frequently related to a sovereign
state. A cautious investigation of the counter provincial battles in Asia and Africa would, in
any case, demonstrate that the colonized nations have attempted to utilize the instruments of
discretion to free their territory from the pioneer burden. From the season of Har Dayal in the
early many years of this century, to the present-day Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO),
the colonized people groups, looking for equity and autonomy, have sought after political and
semi strategic exercises to accomplish opportunity from an outsider principle. The patriot tact
has depended on the tried and true procedure of featuring through publicity the predicament of
one’s nation in different nations or at a worldwide discussion and storing up help moral,
financial and political, for its freedom. The Oxford English Dictionary characterizes strategy
as “the administration of global relations by exchanges; the technique by which these relations
are balanced and overseen by representatives and agents”. Harold Nicolson in his investigation
of the subject acknowledges this definition. This definition be that as it may, mirrors a restricted
idea of discretion. Seen 1n an interdisciplinary point of view discretion must be seen as the
entire procedure of overseeing relations with different states and universal establishments. On
account of the counter pilgrim opportunity battles a definitive national intrigue was the
achievement of freedom. The strategic and semi political exercises of areas of the patriot elites
abroad embody an emblematic portrayal of the national interests of the colonized countries.
These non-state transnationals performing artists, who developed their own strategy, completed

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 13

the job of informal agents of their separate nations. For the motivations behind this examination
we comprehend tact in its multilateral structure, as the lead of worldwide relations and their
alteration between and among a few global performing artists, for the most part inside the
system of intergovernmental associations. These relations spread those between governments,
relations between worldwide associations, and gatherings themselves. Their administration and
change happen inside the system of gatherings and gatherings and furthermore through useful
participation and joint political endeavours. Keeping this critical part of discretion in view, the
present postulation principally centres around the strategic and semi political exercises of the
patriot elites of Afro-Asian nations in their battles against imperialism. The three contextual
investigations, that of India, Indonesia and Algeria, taken from three unique districts of the
world, with various racial and ethnic foundations and colonized by three distinctive European
powers, the British, the Dutch and the French individually, offer extensive assortment and are
picked to make the examination more extensive as it would see it and more extensive in points
of view. The strategic strategies received for the freedom of their properties contrasted from
nation to nation. The Indian patriot first class under the Congress party made established
disturbance the premise of the counter British battle. The gathering initiative had a firm
conviction that just under a structure of liberal-constitutionalism could India gain her autonomy
from the British. Noteworthy deviations from the stance of the tact of the Congress party were
attempted with some achievement, by men like Har Dayal, M. N. Roy and Subhas Chandra
Bose. These strands of the Indian patriot first class, who were disappointed with the Congress
control, left a positive engraving on the definition of India’s tact amid her opportunity battle.

7. THEORIES AND APPROACHES OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

7.1. LIBERAL APPROACH

The tradition of liberal political thought as propounded by liberal thinkers like Immanuel Kant,
Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, John Stuart Mill, John Locke, David Hume, Jean Jacques
Rousseau and Adam Smith was revived, adopted and transformed to give birth to the liberal
approach to IR. The chief proponents of post-World War I liberalism were Alfred Zimmern,
Norman Angell, James T. Shotwell and Woodrow Wilson. They are sometimes referred to as
liberal idealists or simply idealists. E.H. Carr (1939), however, ascribed them as utopians.

At the heart of the liberal worldview lie certain basic assumptions about the human rationality
and morality, belief in reforming institutions as solutions to problems and most importantly

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 14

idea about human progress. In the words of David Sidorsky17 liberalism consists of “In simplest
terms, first a conception of man as desiring freedom and capable of exercising rational free
choice. Second, it is a perspective on social institutions as open to rational reconstruction in
the light of individual needs. It is third, a view of history as progressively perfectible through
the continuous application of human reason to social institutions.”

Based on their optimism, the liberalists conceptualize the individual as the possessor of
rationality and a seat of moral values and virtues and also capable of controlling their basic
impulses. They try to justify their rational and immoral behaviour of the individuals as not the
manifestations of flawed human nature but the result of ignorance and misunderstanding, which
is possible to overcome through education and reforming of social and political institutions.

Alongside such positive picturization of human beings, the liberals tend to be less emphatic
about social and individual conflicts as inevitable. They believe that it is possible to bring about
the greatest good for the greatest number that would reap benefits for all and create an order
that would maximize individual freedom and material and economic prosperity. Theological
corollary of this is the concept of ‘harmony of interests.’

Contrary to the realist position that focuses on the possibility of conflict of interests and clashes,
the liberals lay emphasis on the common interests. The belief is that people and nations share
common interests and the prospects of cooperative activities among them will satisfy these
interests. Liberals are critical about the realist perspective of international conflict and war and
consider them as a distortion of reality. On the other hand, they believe that on the whole the
majority of interactions among nations are cooperative and nonconflictual. Wars do take place
but they contend that the majority of nations live in peace and the fact that they are at peace is
not because of any balance of power.

Most importantly, the liberal contention for human progress is worth mentioning. At the core
of this thinking is also the implicit trust or liberal faith that human beings by nature are rational
creatures. The liberals reject the realist position that the basic dynamics and fundamental
realities of international relations remain unchanged. They contend that as people are rational,
they would learn that certain things such as war is irrational and undesirable and, as they learn
more about how the world they live in works they will gain knowledge which ultimately will
help them to solve problems. As Robert Gilpin (War and Change in World Politics, 1981) noted

17
DAVID SIDORSKY, THE LIBERAL TRADITION IN E UROPEAN THOUGHTS (Capricorn Books, New York, p.2, 1970).

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 15

that, just as realism ‘is founded on a pessimism regarding moral progress and human
possibilities’, so too liberalism is founded on an optimism regarding moral progress and human
possibilities.

Kegley and Wittkopf18 present the underlying beliefs of the liberalist worldview and uphold
that the basic assumptions off liberalism are:

1. Human nature is essentially “good” or altruistic and people are, therefore, capable of
mutual aid and collaboration.
2. The fundamental human concern for others welfare makes progress possible.
3. Bad human behaviour, such as violence, is the product not of flawed pe0ple but of evil
institutions which encourage people to act selfishly and to harm others.
4. War is not inevitable and its frequency can be reduced by eradicating the institutional
arrangements that encourage it.
5. War is an international problem requiring collective or multilateral, rather than national,
efforts to control it.
6. The international society must reorganize itself in order to eliminate the institutions that
make war likely and nations must reform their political systems so that self-
determination and democratic governance within states can help pacify relations among
states.

However, there were several manifestations of idealisms before and after the inter-War period.
It can be said that there were ‘contending liberalisms’ at work in world politics during that time
and later. They can be classified as:

Liberal Internationalism: This strand of liberal thinking puts faith in human reason and
believes that this reason could deliver freedom and justice in international relations. Their
emphasis was on transformation of individual consciousness, abolishing war, setting up of a
world government, promoting free trade and maintaining peace. Liberal internationalists talked
about the ‘harmony of interests’ in international relations, which was vehemently criticized by
EH. Carr in his famous work The Twenty Years Crisis (1939). Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832)
and Immanuel Kant (1724-4804) were the leading exponents of liberal internationalism.

18
CHARLES W. KEGLEY & E UGENE R. WITTKOPF, WORLD POLITICS – TRENDS AND TRANSFORMATION (St.
Martin’s Press, New York, p.20, 1997).

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 16

Idealism: Unlike the liberal internationalists, the idealists believed that peace and prosperity is
not a natural condition but is one which must be constructed and for which the requirement is
of ‘consciously devised machinery’. In other words, they talked about the establishment of an
international institution to secure peace and, with this objective, they supported the moves for
the establishment of the United Nations after the failure of the League of Nations. They were
also the proponents of collective security, human rights, ‘New International Economic
Orderpeace and disarmament’.

Liberal Institutionalism: David Mitrany (1966) and Ernst Haas (1968) were the earlier liberal
institutionalists who believed that integration through international and regional institutions
would help to solve common problems. Their work provided impetus for increased cooperation
between the European states. The later liberal institutionalists such as Keohane and Nye
emphasized the centrality of actors other than the states and focused on transnationalism and
interdependence.

The core content of these contending liberalisms was, however, akin to the emphasis on
economic freedom, support for national self-determination, international system organized and
regulated on the basis of norms and rules, doctrine of non-intervention, opposition to
authoritarian rule, outlawing war and disarmament.

Neo-Liberal Internationalism: This strand of neo-liberal thinking is dominated by the

supporters of democratic peace thesis whose core thinking is based on the assumption that
liberal states do not go to war with other liberal states. To this end Francis Fukuyama (1989)
in his article entitled “The End of History” in The National Interest, championed the victory
of liberalism overall ideologies and contended that liberal states were internally more stable
and more peaceful in international relations. He believes that liberal states have established
pacific union within which war becomes unthinkable.

Neo-Idealism: Advocates of neo-idealism like David Held, Norberto Bobbio and Danielle
Archibugi believe that global politics must be democratized. David Held even prescribes a
“cosmopolitan model of democracy” in place of Westphalian and UN models, and creation of
regional parliaments, extension of the authority of regional bodies such as the European Union,
as well as democratization of international organizations like the UN. He also recommends the
realization of human rights through national parliaments and monitoring by a new International
Court of Human Rights.

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 17

Neo-Liberal Institutionalism: Proponents of neo-liberal institutionalism like Axelrod,

Keohane and Nye put forward their ideas in response to Kenneth Waltz’s theory of neo-realism
in his famous work Theory of International Politics (1979). This strand of neo-liberal
institutionalism shares with the realists the assumption that states are the most significant actors
and the international environment is anarchic. But the neo-liberal institutionalists try to focus
on the task of initiating and maintaining cooperation among states under conditions of anarchy.
7.2. POLITICAL REALISM

Realism has been the most dominant school of thought in the post-World War 1] international
relations and still continues to have relevance in the present international relations scenario.
The principal line of thinking of the realist school is in terms of power and its exercise by states.
In other words, it is chiefly concerned with realpolitik.

The basic assumptions of realism are:

1. The international system is anarchic.

2. Sovereign states are the principal actors in the international system.
3. States are rational unitary actors each acting under the consideration of its own national
interest.
4. National security and survival are the primary ‘national interest’ of each state.
5. In pursuit of national security, states strive to increase national power.
6. National power and capabilities determine the relations among states.
7. National interest, defined in terms of national power, guides the actions of the states in
international relations.

The seeds of realism, however, could be traced to the writings of political philosophers like
Thucydides, an ancient Greek historian who wrote the History of the Peloponnesian War and
is also cited as an intellectual forerunner of realpolitik, Chanakya’s Arthashastra;
Machiavelli’s, Il Principe (The Prince); Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan; Otto von Bismarck, a
Prussian statesman who coined the term balance of power and Carl von Clausewitz a nineteenth
century Prussian general and military theorist who wrote 011 War (Von Kriege) in which he
propounded his greatest dictum that war is nothing but a continuation of politics by other
means.

Their understanding of realpolitik deeply influenced the political realists’ perspective of

looking at world politics especially from the viewpoint of human nature which they relocated

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 18

in the sphere of reified states. This will lead us to a discussion on the propositions put forward
by some of the political philosophers and how they helped in the “construction of state”,
“construction of masculinity” and “construction of warrior mentality” in the discipline of IR.

Machiavelli’s classic work The Prince is an embodiment of what a prince should actually be
and the ways he should wield his power in order to gain and maintain his sway over his state.
To do this, he could resort to unprincipled means not sanctioned by religious or ethical
standards and still be virtuous. The prince should combine in him the qualities of the man and
the beast. He should be able to assume the potentialities of the fox and the lion at the same
time. Machiavelli’s contention is that new princedoms are either acquired or are held through
a man’s own armies and his Virtu, and not through fortune. Here, he gives a masculine
character to the statecraft as he describes fortune as a female who is always to be trusted and
is always attracted by the ‘vir’, the man of true manliness, a friend of the brave and those who
are “less cautious and more spirited”.[8] If a virtuous and prudent ruler wishes to master
fortune, then Machiavelli’s advice is to “strike and beat her and you will see that she allows
herself to be more easily vanquished by the rash and the violent than by those who proceed
more slowly and coldly”.

Chanakya’s Arthashastra, written in Sanskrit, discusses the principles of statecraft at length.

The title, Arthashastra, which means “the Science of Material Gain” or “Science of Polity”,
does not leave any doubt about its ends. Kautilya suggested that the ruler should use any means
to attain his goal and his actions require no moral sanction. The problems discussed are of the
most practical kind faced by the kings, and the solutions suggested are still relevant and
practicable in the modern administrative world. Espionage and the liberal use of provocative
agents are recommended on a large scale in Chapter XI of Book I on The Institution ofSpies.
Murder and false accusations were to be used by a king’s secret agents without any thoughts
to morals or ethics. There are chapters for kings to help them keep in check the premature
ambitions of their sons, and likewise chapters intended to help princes to thwart their fathers’
domineering authority too.

Hobbes in his Leviathan portrays a state of nature, which is horrific and undoubtedly anarchic.
The root cause of this anarchy lies at the basic characteristics of human nature, which persuades
every man to be enemy of every man for three principal causes-competition, diffidence and
glory. Therefore, in such a condition there are “no arts; no letters; no society and which is worst
of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty,

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 19

brutish, and short”. Force and fraud are the two cardinal virtues. To come out of this situation,
man entered into a contract “a covenant of every man with every man” and thus the multitude
united in one person-the Commonwealth, in Latin, civitas. Therefore, the Leviathan, the civil
immortal God, was born and with it came into existence the sovereign, society and the political
authority.

7.3. NEO-REALISM
The realist tradition suffered a setback due to the emergence of the neo-liberal thought,
especially the challenge posed by ‘pluralism’. State-centrism of a; traditional realists received
a serious jolt as pluralists emphasized the fact that state may be a significant actor in
international relations but it is not the sole actor. In other words, they acknowledged a plurality
of actors in international relations as will be discussed just now. The pluralist’s challenge to
realism was soon met by a new brand of realists, and the forerunner among them was Kenneth
Waltz. Waltz in his famous works, Man, the State and War (1959) and Theory of International
Politics (1979), came up with his idea of world politics which is popularly known as neo-
realism. Waltz argues that the key difference between international and domestic politics lies
not in the regularity of war and conflict but in the structure of international system. In the
absence of higher authority in the international system, there is no other way to secure oneself
other than self-help which will ultimately lead to security dilemma because security build-up
of one would lead to insecurity of others. The resultant anarchy for the neo-realists is, therefore,
due to the presence of a system characterized by the absence of a higher power over the
sovereign states. It is this structure of international system which decisively shapes up the
behaviour of states in international relations and their struggle for power. Thus, the sources of
conflict or causes of war, unlike what the traditional or classical realists argue, do not rest on
the human nature but within the basic framework of the anarchic structure of international
relations. Waltz uses game theory (an economic concept which is widely used in many fields
today) in addressing the balance of power and self-help in this environment. He says that
balance of power results in this kind of a system irrespective of the intentions of a particular
state. But in international politics, in the absence of authority to effectively prohibit the use of
force, the balance of power among states becomes most often a balance of capabilities,
including physical force, which states choose to use in pursuing their goals. Thus, in a self-help
system, the logic of self-interest provides a basis of understanding the problem of coordinating
the interests of individual versus the interests of the common good and the pay-off between
short-term interests and long-term interests. Neo-realists did not overlook the prospects of

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 20

cooperation among states also. But the point of contention was that, states, while cooperating
with each other, tried to maximize their relative power and preserve their autonomy.
7.4. SYSTEM THEORY

The systems theory originated primarily due to the behavioural revolution in social science.
The desire of the new genre of social scientists, to evolve a general body of knowledge by
integrating the various disciplines of social sciences, finally led to the emergence of a host of
theoretical approaches inspired by natural science methods. The chief among them was the
systems analysis, and prominent contributions in the field of international politics were made
by Easton, Kalpon, Boulding and others.

Kaplan describes six Models of International system.

1. The Balance of Power System

2. The Loose Bipolar System
3. The Tight Bipolar System
4. The Universal System
5. The Hierarchical System
6. The Unit Veto System

The Balance of Power System: According to Kaplan, the period between 1815 and 1914
experienced a golden age of Balance of Power (BOP). Since the beginning of the twentieth
century, the system started faltering as rules started to be flouted by major international actors.
Finally, the whole BOP system collapsed with the outbreak of the First World War in 1914.
Kaplan also suggested certain basic rules for the functioning of the balance of power system.
These rules meant that one takes the following steps:

1. Act to increase capabilities but negotiate rather than fight.

2. Fight rather than pass up an opportunity to increase capabilities.
3. Stop fighting rather than eliminate an essential national actor.
4. Act to oppose any coalition or single actor which tends to assume a position to
predominance with respect to the rest of the system.
5. Act to constrain actors who subscribe to supranational organizing principles.
6. Permit defeated or constrained essential national actors to re-enter the system as
acceptable role partners or act to bring some previously inessential actor within the
essential actor classification.

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 21

7. Treat all essential actors as acceptable role partners.

The Loose Bipolar System: The loose bipolar system, often recognized as the ‘Cold War’
model, envisages an international system that comes into operation when there are only two
superpowers leading their respective competitive blocs and there is also a simultaneous
presence of non-member bloc-actors and universal actors. Thus, this system would comprise
two major bloc actors: the non-aligned states and international organizations like the United
Nations. Both blocs try to increase their capabilities and are willing to run at least some risks
to eliminate rival bloc. Both blocs also attempt to subordinate the objectives of the universal
actors to their own objectives. Nonaligned states, on the other hand, try to support the universal
actor to check the power of the two blocs and reduce the danger of war between them. Both
blocs strive to increase their membership but at the same time tolerate the status of the non-
aligned states.

The Tight Bipolar System: The loose bipolar system may get transformed into a tight bipolar
system where two major powers lead their respective blocs and it virtually becomes different
forms of interactions between the two blocs. In this system, therefore, the role of non-aligned
states or non-member states either disappears or become less significant. Even universal actors
such as international organizations become too weak to mediate.

The Universal System: This system emerges when the world gets transformed into a federal
world state based on the principle of mutual tolerance and universal rule of law. The system
almost resembles a world federation. It, therefore, works through a universal actor such as an
international organization like the United Nations or such other agencies, which would have
the necessary capacity to maintain peace and security and prevent war, once the bipolar system
ceases. It would be performing judicial, economic, political and administrative work although
the states would enjoy sufficient autonomy.

The Hierarchical System: Such system will come into existence when a single universal actor
absorbs all the other states either through conquest or treaty. The system will be directive if
found on the basis of world conquest. It would be non-directive when power would be
distributed among units according to hierarchy under the domination of a single national actor.
The states as territorial units are, thus, transformed into functional units. The nondirective
system is based on will, and the directive system on force.

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 22

The Unit Veto System: This is a kind of system when all the states would possess equal
potentialities to destroy each other. The mere possession of deadly weapons and nukes would
deter the attacks on a particular state. Therefore, this system reaches stability when a state can
resist and retaliate threats from every other state.

8. BALANCE OF POWER

The idea of “equilibrium” as an equivalent word for “balance” is normally utilized in numerous
sciences-material science. science. financial matters. human science. what’s more, political
theory. It connotes security inside a framework made out of various self-sufficient powers. At
whatever point the harmony is bothered either by an outside power or by an adjustment in
either components forming the framework. the framework demonstrates a propensity to restore
either the first or another harmony. Along these lines, harmony exists in the human body. While
the human body changes during the time spent development. the balance continues as long as
the progressions happening in the distinctive organs of the body don’t irritate the body’s
dependability. This is particularly so if the quantitative and subjective changes in the diverse
organs are proportionate to one another. At the point when. in any case. the body endures an
injury or loss of one of its organs through outside obstruction. or on the other hand encounters
a dangerous development or a neurotic change of one of its organs. the balance is exasperating.
what’s more, the body attempts to conquer the unsettling influence by restoring the balance
either on the equivalent or an alternate dimension from the one that got before the aggravation
happened.

A similar idea of equilibrium is utilized in a social science. for example, financial matters. with
reference to the relations between the diverse components of the financial framework. for
example, among reserve funds and speculations. fares and imports. free market activity.
expenses and costs. Contemporary private enterprise itself has been portrayed as an
arrangement of “countervailing power.”19 It additionally applies to society in general. In this
manner, we scan for an appropriate harmony between various topographical areas. for example,
the East and the West. the North and the South: between various types of exercises, for
example, agribusiness and industry, substantial and light ventures, of all shapes and sizes
organizations, makers and purchasers, the executives and work: between various useful
gatherings, for example, city and nation, the old. the moderately aged. what’s more, the

19
John K. Galbraith, American Capitalism, the Concept of Countervailing Power, (Boston: Houghton Mifflin,
1952).

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 23

youthful. the monetary and the political circle, the white-collar classes and the upper and lower
classes.

9. FUNCTIONS OF DIPLOMACY

There are five important functions of Diplomacy. The functions were done by the diplomats of
the states.

9.1. REPRESENTATION
It is the capacity which perpetual missions performed all the more obviously since their
foundation as organs of outer relations of States. The portrayal work implies that strategic
specialists take an interest to occasions in open life, representing the sending State, for example
the endorsement frame of mind which it accepts as for noteworthy minutes in the open
existence of the nation of living arrangement. The strategic mission doesn’t speak to the head
of State nor the Government, yet the sending State as subject of worldwide law. This is the
reason it is important to make an unmistakable qualification between the capacity of portrayal
of a political mission and the juridical demonstration of portrayal in universal law. Universal
portrayal of States is a juridical affinity on whose ground a State concedes another State the
privilege to satisfy juridical activities towards a third State. In this manner, on account of global
portrayal we can distinguish three subjects of universal law. It isn’t the situation of conciliatory
mission, which is certainly not a subject of global law, however an organ that helps keeping up
and creating relations between two States as subjects of the discretionary affinity.

9.2. NEGOTIATION
Like representation, it is one of the capacities that changeless discretionary missions performed
since their foundation. Negotiation implies looking at an issue of basic enthusiasm for request
to settle it.
Starting here of view, arrangement can’t be restricted to exchanges during the time spent fixing
global accords. Right now, they speak to an imperative field in the action of a conciliatory
mission, playing out the negotiation work when directing dialogs with capable organs of the
accepting State on issues of shared concern: protecting the interests of the sending State’s
natives on the region of the getting State, explaining suits, acquiring focal points and keeping
any political and monetary estimates that would impair one State or the other and so on.20

20
DUMITRU MAZILU, TREATY REGARDING NEGOTIAION THEORY AND PRACTICE (Lumina Lex Publishing House,
Bucharest, p. 460, 2002).

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 24

Negotiation can be legitimate (started formally for the sake of two States) or impertinent (test
contacts that don’t submit the States in any capacity). Official dealings are immediate (between
the head of the conciliatory mission and the head of State) or backhanded (between the head
of the political mission and the worldwide issues service or the subordinates of the last
mentioned).
Negotiation is frequently viewed as a blend of logical and imaginative techniques, since the
ambassador must have information, experience and ability to be a decent moderator.
Investigation of history, by and large, and history of strategic relations, specifically, are
exceptionally helpful in building up the authority of exchange.21

9.3. INFORMATION
Advancing inviting relations, neighbourliness and collaboration between States relies upon
shared comprehension of States' monetary, social and political substances.
Thusly the data and perception work. By playing out this capacity, the discretionary mission
gives the sending State information gotten by legitimate methods, with respect to household
life and worldwide governmental issues in the nation of living arrangement. The discretionary
mission must play out its capacities utilizing official and impertinent contacts, broad
communications and neighbourhood diaries, artistic and logical productions. Concerning this
perspective, under segment (d) from article 3, the 1961 Vienna Convention focuses on the legal
character that any data source utilized by the conciliatory mission must have.

9.4. DIPLOMATIC PROTECTION

There is a nearby association between portrayal, exchange and security capacities. By playing
out the last mentioned, the strategic mission accomplishes security of interests that the sending
State and the work force under its power may have in the nation of home. In reality, when the
discretionary mission speaks to its State and consults with experts in the getting State, at that
point it acts for the sake of explicit interests, so as to authorize and advance these interests. The
barrier works as perceived by global law enables the conciliatory mission to offer political
insurance to natives of the sending State, who are or live in the accepting State. Mediations at
a political dimension can dispense with biased interest, fix preference endured by these
residents and attempt by legitimate intends to safeguard them against unlawfulness they could
be exposed to.22

21
Id.
22
GHEORGHE JACOB, INTRODUCTION IN DIPLOMACY (Foundation Axis Publishing House, Iasi, p. 345, 1997).

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 25

9.5. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION.

The point of the strategic mission is communicated by a focal capacity that spellbinds the frame
of mind of every other capacity toward the other objective: advancing cordial relations and
collaboration between the sending State and the getting State. Subsequently, political missions
satisfy a fundamental job when putting resources into the respective connection excellencies
that change it in the essential positive component during the time spent setting worldwide
relations on good, reasonableness and legitimate standards. On the off chance that we envision
universal relations as a huge system, the reciprocal connection establishes the essential affinity
of this structure, while the ruling atmosphere of this two-sided compatibility, developed by
solicitations of neighbourliness, kinship, participation, shared comprehension and regard
between people groups, can be scattered in the entire structure of global relations causing their
constructive improvement. In the monetary field, the discretionary mission can arrange
participation understandings in different spaces, can take measures to perform them or increase
by different methods material and profound changes between the individual people groups.

10. CONCLUSION

From the above study it can be said that the means and functions of international relations are
very important. In present world one nation cannot lives independently without the help of
others to they have to maintain a good relation between themselves with the help of their
respective diplomats.

To sum up, international norms, the use of diplomacy, multilateral use of force, must represent
contemporary international relations implicitly. The act of any state toward other state should
be justified in the arena of international politics. The states have to convey their message for
other states in the form of balance of power, by using different measures like suppression,
persuasion, force etc. The function of international non-state organisation is very important in
maintaining peace and harmony in world. Let’s say, if a war is break between two countries
the non-state actors work will become very important as it was the only object in good terms
with the states. Non-state actor acted as a mediator between two states.

As culture is changing, way of living has been changed since times. It’s a duty of every state
to look into the matters related to internationals relations, external security and diplomacy.

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY 26

11. BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Morgenthau, Politics among Nations: The Struggle of Power and Peace (Kalyani
publishers, New Delhi, 1985).
2. Norman J Padelford, & George A. Lincoln, International Politics: Foundations of
International Relations (New York, 1954).
3. Norman D. Palmer & Howard C. Perkins, International Relations- The World
Community in Transition (A.I.T.B.S. Publishers, New Delhi, 1997).
4. Hoffmen, Contemporary Theory of International Relations (ed., Stanley, New jersey,
1960).
5. Wright, Quincy, The Study of International Relations (Appleton-Century Crofts, New
York, 1955).
6. Frankel Joseph, International Relations in a Changing World (Oxford University Press,
London, 1979).
7. Joshua S. Goldstein, International Relations (Pearson Education, New Delhi, 2006).
8. Jackson Robert & George Sorensen, Introduction to International Relations-Theories
and Approaches (Oxford University Press, London, 1999).
9. Lawson Stephanie, International Relations (Polity Press, UK, 2004).
10. James E. Dougherty & Robert L. Pfaltzgraff, Contending Theories of International
Relations: A Comprehensive Survey (Longman, New York, 1997).
11. Theodre A. Couloumbis & James H. Wolfe, Introduction to International Relations-
Power and Justice (Prentice Hall of India, New Delhi, 1986).
12. Kal J. Holsti, The Study of International Politics during the Cold War in Tim Dunne
(eds., Michael Cox & Ken Booth, Cambridge University Press, London, 1998).
13. David Sidorsky, The liberal tradition in European Thoughts (Capricorn Books, New
York, 1970).
14. Charles W. Kegley & Eugene R. Wittkopf, World Politics – Trends and Transformation
(St. Martin’s Press, New York, 1997).
15. John K. Galbraith, American Capitalism, the Concept of Countervailing Power,
(Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1952).
16. Dumitru Mazilu, Treaty Regarding Negotiaion Theory and Practice (Lumina Lex
Publishing House, Bucharest, 2002).
17. Gheorghe Jacob, Introduction in Diplomacy (Foundation Axis Publishing House, Iasi,
1997).

POLITICAL SCIENCE-II